The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable David O. Carter United States District Court Judge
This Document Relates To: ALL ACTIONS
JUDGMENT Date:October 5, 2009 Time:3:00 p.m.
This matter came on for hearing on October 5, 2009, upon the joint application of the Settling Parties for approval of the settlement set forth in the Joint Stipulation of Class Action Settlement and Release (the "Stipulation"). Due and adequate notice having been given to the Rule 23 Class and the FLSA Collective Group, and the Court having considered the Stipulation, all papers filed and proceedings had herein and all oral and written comments received regarding the proposed settlement, and having reviewed the record in this Litigation, and good cause appearing,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Court, for purposes of this Judgment and Order of Dismissal ("Judgment"), adopts all defined terms as set forth in the Stipulation filed in this case.
2. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Litigation,the Class Representatives, the Rule 23 Class Members, the FLSA Collective Group, and Defendants Wachovia Corporation, Wachovia Securities, LLC, and First Union Securities, Inc. (the "Wachovia Defendants").
3. The Court finds that the distribution of the Class Notice as provided for in the Preliminary Approval Order, constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances to all Persons within the definition of the Rule 23 Class and FLSA Collective Group, and fully met the requirements of due process under the United States Constitution. Based on evidence and other material submitted in conjunction with the settlement hearing, the Class Notice was adequate. The Court further finds that the Wachovia Defendants have satisfied the requirements of notice to pertinent government agencies set forth in the federal Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1715.
4. The Court finds that the instant Litigation, in part, presented a good faith dispute over the payment of wages, and the Court finds in favor of settlement approval.
5. The Court OVERRULES the objection of Gerald Rouse, and DENIES his motion to intervene, on the grounds that as a non-class member, he lacks standing to object or intervene. See, e.g., In re Vitamins Antitrust Class Actions, 215 F.3d 26, 28-29 (D.C. Cir. 2000); Arakaki v. Cayetano, 324 F.3d 1078, 1083 (9th Cir. 2003).
6. The Court approves the settlement of the above-captioned action, as set forth in the Stipulation, and each of the releases and other terms, as fair, just, reasonable and adequate as to the Settling Parties. The Settling Parties are directed to perform in accordance with the terms set forth in the Stipulation.
7. For the Class Representatives as well as for those Members of the Rule 23 Class and FLSA Collective Group who filed valid and timely Claim Forms, all of the claims covered by the Federal Claims Release ...